Dismissed

Harwant Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Jan 2011CRWP/498/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking release of his minor son from respondents on grounds that mother resides in Philippines and has entrusted child to her parents. Court noted mother is natural guardian. Petitioner was permitted to withdraw petition with liberty to approach court under Guardians and Wards Act.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the court under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

Harwant Singh Vs State of Punjab and… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Criminal Writ Petition No. 498 of 2009

¶2

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.

¶4

Criminal Writ Petition No. 498 of 2009

¶5

Date of Decision: 14.1.2011

Harwant Singh

…Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and Others

¶10

…Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

¶12

Present: Mr. Jasbir Singh Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3.

¶14

Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 7.

¶15

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)

¶16

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, by petitioner-Harwant Singh, for release of his minor son namely Arshpreet Singh, aged about eight years, from the alleged illegal custody of respondents No.4 to 7.

¶17

Gurpreet Kaur is present in the Court. She has stated that she has obtained a divorce from the petitioner and being a mother, she is the natural and lawful guardian of her minor son Arshpreet Singh, who is in her custody.

¶18

Criminal Writ Petition No. 498 of 2009

¶19

¶20

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Gurpreet Kaur is residing permanently in Philippines and she has entrusted the custody of her child to her parents. Therefore, the petitioner has a better claim.

¶21

On the observation made by this Court that the mother, being a natural guardian, can entrust the custody of her child to anybody and even she can put the child in the Boarding School, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with the liberty to approach the Court under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, for seeking custody of the child.

¶22

As prayed, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

¶23

(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge

¶24

January 14, 2011 “ DK ”

Harwant Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harwant Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurnek Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Manjit Singh Vs State

Ramesh Kumar Vs State

State of Punjab &Anr Vs Sadhu Singh & Anr.

Paramjit Kaur Vs State

Baldev Singh Vs State